Opel Omega 2000 vs SAAB 9-5 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 120 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 280 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
SAAB 9-5 is a more dynamic driving. Opel Omega engine produces 30 HP less power than SAAB 9-5, but torque is 40 NM more than SAAB 9-5. Due to the lower power, Opel Omega reaches 100 km/h speed 2.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.3 | 9.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 9.3 l/100km | |
|
The Opel Omega is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Opel Omega consumes 2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the SAAB 9-5, which means that by driving the Opel Omega over 15,000 km in a year you can save 300 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Opel Omega consumes 2.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the SAAB 9-5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1020 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 1290 km on highway | 1070 km on highway | ||
| 1050 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| Opel Omega gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (SAAB 9-5) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Opel Omega) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Opel Omega engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Opel Frontera, Opel Sintra | Used also on SAAB 9-3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.90 m | 4.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | 1.50 m | |
| Opel Omega is 9 cm longer than the SAAB 9-5, 1 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1800 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Opel Omega is 0.2 metres more than that of the SAAB 9-5. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`265 | 1`800 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| SAAB 9-5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Opel Omega has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than SAAB 9-5, so SAAB 9-5 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Opel Omega has
|
SAAB 9-5 has
| |